Survey of non-tunneled temporary hemodialysis catheter clinical practice and training
| Autor: | James D. Oliver, Rajeev Raghavan, Dustin J. Little, Rajeev Narayan, Christina M. Yuan, Lisa K. Prince, Robert Nee |
|---|---|
| Rok vydání: | 2018 |
| Předmět: |
Nephrology
medicine.medical_specialty 030232 urology & nephrology Hemodialysis Catheter Workload 030204 cardiovascular system & hematology Catheterization Nephrologists 03 medical and health sciences 0302 clinical medicine Catheters Indwelling Renal Dialysis Internal medicine Surveys and Questionnaires Medicine Humans Competence (human resources) Simulation Training business.industry United States Clinical Practice Education Medical Graduate Emergency medicine Surgery Clinical Competence Curriculum business |
| Zdroj: | The journal of vascular access. 20(5) |
| ISSN: | 1724-6032 |
| Popis: | Background:Nephrologists are placing fewer non-tunneled temporary hemodialysis catheters. Requiring competence for nephrology fellow graduation is controversial.Methods:Anonymous, online survey of all graduates from a single, military nephrology training program (n = 81; 1985–2017) and all US Nephrology program directors (n = 150).Results:Graduate response and completion rates were 59% and 100%, respectively; 93% agreed they had been adequately trained; 58% (26/45) place non-tunneled temporary hemodialysis catheters, independent of academic practice or time in practice, but 12/26 did ⩽5/year and 23/26 referred some or all. The most common reason for continuing non-tunneled temporary hemodialysis catheter placement was that it is an essential emergency procedure (92%). The single most significant barrier was time to do the procedure (49%). Program director response and completion rates were 50% and 79%, respectively. The single most important barrier to fellow competence was busyness of the service (36%), followed by disinterest (21%); 55% believed that non-tunneled temporary hemodialysis catheter insertion competence should be required, with 81% indicating it was an essential emergency procedure. The majority of graduates and program directors agreed that simulation training was valuable; 76% of programs employ simulation. Graduates who had simulation training and program directors with ⩽20 years of practice were significantly more likely to agree that simulation training was necessary.Conclusion:Of the graduate respondents from a single training program, 58% continue to place non-tunneled temporary hemodialysis catheters; 55% of program directors believe non-tunneled temporary hemodialysis catheter procedural competence should be required. Graduates who had non-tunneled temporary hemodialysis catheter simulation training and younger program directors consider simulation training necessary. These findings should be considered in the discussion of non-tunneled temporary hemodialysis catheter curriculum requirements. |
| Databáze: | OpenAIRE |
| Externí odkaz: |
|